Mr. Speaker, yesterday, the left-leaning Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives released its alternative budget. Its budget would increase taxes on middle-class Canadians, engage in freewheeling government spending and close the doors to new markets for Canadian businesses. In other words, it is the type of economic plan the opposition would love to implement.

Mr. Speaker, our Conservative government is very proud of our track record on reducing taxes for Canadians and for entrepreneurs and helping those who create jobs. Unfortunately, some left-leaning think tanks that just simply echo the NDP's call for higher taxes are actually asking that higher taxes be put in the budget.

Let me be clear. That will not happen. We know higher taxes kill Canadian jobs. We do not want that to happen.

Mr. Speaker, Canadians are demanding transparency about the government's $500 million contribution to the 2015 Toronto Pan Am Games. There are reports that they have already gone over budget. Municipalities across the GTA are on the hook for 44% of capital costs, but they have no clue what is going on. Everything has been done in secrecy.

When will the government give municipalities, and all taxpayers, an open and transparent accounting of what is going on?

Mr. Speaker, we are certain that the 2015 games will indeed be a success for Torontonians and all Canadians. What we have put forward is a substantive commitment on behalf of taxpayers.

If he has any concerns with regard to our approach on transparency, when it comes to international sporting events, he needs to look no further than the efforts we made with regard to the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games, where we showed remarkable transparency, brought other governments to the table, showed to Canadian taxpayers how money was invested to ensure that the games were not only a success on the field of sport of play, but also a success for taxpayers.

We want to work with all the partners and ensure there is comfort among taxpayers with all the money that is being invested to ensure this is a winning event, not only sporting wise but also for taxpayers.

Mr. Speaker, the NDP has introduced a bill that would automatically register all Canadian seniors for the guaranteed income supplement, to include those who are not receiving it but are entitled to it. An estimated 135,000 seniors are eligible for the GIS and are not receiving their cheques. Instead of saving money at the expense of our least fortunate seniors, we must help lift them out of poverty.

Will the government support our bill to automatically register seniors for the GIS or not?

Kellie LeitchParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour

Mr. Speaker, we are committed to ensuring that seniors in our country receive their benefits. We have done many things toward that goal. Whether it be in 2007, when we created automatic renewal for GIS, or whether it is the proactive sending out 600,000 applications every year to those who do not receive GIS, OAS or CPP, or whether it be increasing the greatest increase in GIS in the last 25 years, these are all things the NDP voted against.

Mr. Speaker, farmers, processors, transporters and others in the agricultural supply chain sometimes have issues with CFIA as their regulator. Sometimes this can be things like quarantines of a farm or inspectors not providing consistent inspection. Fortunately, I know our government is acting and launching a new CFIA service commitment.

Could the parliamentary secretary please update the House on this very new issue?

Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to improving service delivery for producers, consumers and other stakeholders in the food processing system.

I am happy to announce that we are launching a new complaints and appeals process. This new single window approach will provide a more transparent and accessible way for stakeholders to register complaints and appeals.

This commitment aims to improve interactions with CFIA stakeholders by offering a clear explanation of what the CFIA does, its service standards and what stakeholders can expect when dealing with the agency.

Mr. Speaker, two women in my riding are afraid of losing their home on the Îles-de-Boucherville in the St. Lawrence River. The Durocher family has been asking the federal government since 1997 to reinforce the embankment with rocks to prevent erosion. The situation is urgent: their ancestral home is in jeopardy and could be lost within two years.

Will the Minister of the Environment act quickly to protect all the homes located along the St. Lawrence as well as the archaeological and architectural remains of the municipalities along the St. Lawrence?

Mr. Speaker, with less than two weeks to go before the budget, a large number of employed and unemployed workers are worried about the government's silence on the employment insurance program. They are worried about the imminent end of the three pilot projects that help people in many Quebec regions like mine, because the pilot projects are critical to ensuring the dignity of the men and women who have lost their jobs and the workers who are dependent on seasonal work.

Instead of pillaging the employment insurance fund, as they tried in the last budget, will the Conservatives show that they understand the needs of the unemployed by enhancing the employment insurance program and announcing—right now—the permanent renewal of the employment insurance pilot projects?

Kellie LeitchParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development and to the Minister of Labour

Mr. Speaker, I will not speculate on what will be or will not be in the budget. However, I will say that our government's top priority is job creation and economic growth, making sure that workers are well supported and that we provide all of the opportunities for young people, older people, seasonal workers and others to have gainful employment in this country.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order that relates to Standing Orders 16 and 18. Standing Order 16(2) states:

When a Member is speaking, no Member shall...interrupt him or her, except to raise a point of order.

Standing Order 18 states:

No member shall speak disrespectfully...nor use offensive words against...any member thereof.

The House started the 41st Parliament with a real commitment to respectful discourse, but there is no question it has slid badly. There is no one party which is solely responsible. Every party has played its part in making the atmosphere unpleasant and excessively partisan.

However, I must say that I found the treatment of the hon. member for Saint-Jean when he was posing his question today to be despicable. Imagine ourselves as teachers in a schoolyard where one child may not speak as clearly as the others and a bunch of bully boys decide to make fun of that child as he is speaking. We would look on that situation and as teachers, we would say, “Excuse me boys, you don't speak to so and so that way. Give him a chance”.

Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleagues who spoke. I would just like to say to them that I already know how to read, therefore I am learning to speak. Perhaps in a few years, I will know how to speak. I will be on the other side and I will speak to you.